About this Show

Mc Laughlin Group

News/Business. (2011) New.

NETWORK
PBS

DURATION
00:30:00

RATING

SCANNED IN
San Francisco,CA

SOURCE
Comcast

TUNER
Channel 71 (507 MHz)

VIDEO CODEC
mpeg2video

AUDIO CODEC
ac3

PIXEL WIDTH
528

PIXEL HEIGHT
480

TOPIC FREQUENCY

Boehner 15, John Boehner 7, Freddie 7, U.s. 6, America 3, Sullenberger 3, Afghanistan 2, New York 2, Biion 1, Pentagon 1, Ial Unregulation 1, Questi 1, Eanor 1, Politilly Ambusiness 1, Iowa 1, Rom Ohio 1, Obama Administration 1, Estion 1, Eck Clued 1, Ess Pressedthem 1,
Borrow a DVD
of this show
  PBS    Mc Laughlin Group    News/Business.  (2011) New.  

    July 13, 2011
    6:30 - 7:00pm PDT  

6:30pm
from washington, "the mclaughlin group," the american origin. for over two decades, the sharpest
6:31pm
now is the time to deal with the fiscal problems we have in an adult-like manner. no more whistling past the graveyard. >> ohio republican congressman and speaker john boehner presides over the largest republic majority in more than 60 years, 240 republicans, 192 democrats, in the house of representatives. this means that for president obama to push through any of his legislation, he must have
6:32pm
the support of speaker boehner. recently, speaker boehner pla9ed that critical role when he gained house republican support for the current 2011 federal budget. that governors u.s. spending for fiscal year october 1 of last year, 2010, through september 30 of this year, 2011. this budget averted a shutdown of the federal government. the successful passage of the fy2011 budget was@a ey're in th cap. >> i'm pleased that senator reid and i and the white house have been able to come to an agreement that will in fact cut vernment op. >> questi, the last time e repuicans took over e use was in 94, 17 years ago, when bill inton was president. john boehner to then former use speaker newt @@gingrich, how well is boehner doing? i ask you, major garrettí
6:33pm
>> this lots of ways to measure that. one is the polling data. gingri's he's negatives were always higher an his positives. john boehnes positives are yawl to his negatis so he's doing@better in the@polling with the american public. congress's approval rating though is lower now than it was in the@mid-90s. congress is held in much higher ntempt now than then. analysis. the inside coress analysis is that this stage of speaker gingrich speakehip he already had the contract of america through, to 10 high priority items sos he had more legislative victories than ehner does now. but that was e fective end of the gingrich speakership. boehner has taken a gradsistic approach, removing power from the speakership, giving it@more to the chairmen, allowing legislation to move through the
6:34pm
house, that is giving him latitude to strike deals some boehner internally is stronger and is probably going@to remain s(nger as a eaker an gingrich was. >> do you think all@of at which@ good rction on is there something more constitutionally about the two? who is more likable? >> well, at the beginningyou would have thought that @@newt towards of end @@eve"y his regi he was much less likae. yet evident boner's approach, he d an hints electriccual and policy concept that was implicit the contract with america, and he still speaks in those terms. he is an extraordinary intellent man@about these but hey, his political ills i thk were not shall we say well lustrated @@as his speakership@wen$ on. boehner @@i think will endure a much more popular and
6:35pm
stronger speaker within his own years cause he is -- as major was saying, he sharese wer organize the republicans and therore lost some of his@ grassroots support. eanor, who is the more politilly ambiou >>by almo measure boehner is politilly ambusiness, newt p"esident. running for it's not much of a campaign. i don't think we'll ever see john boehner run @@for presiden but@i think that's side the point. boehner is a man who has ben in the congress a long time. he's bn edged out of in. he's very crafty politician. he goesdown smoo$h like scoh on the rocks. he is almost from another era. and he smart@enou to always appear reasonable in public. d has quite a challenge with his tea@party @@freshm in to rse the debt ceiling. @@deal
6:36pm
so i think he's a@deal maker, and gingri wasn't. rather have boehner in h >> james, do u think boehner has@a shot at $he pridency? >> i unaware he's expressed any desire. >> u ink he has a ot at it? express @@me desire. we'll see what the -- >> independently of that, whether he expresses desire or not, do you think the goods are >> i'll tell you. he comes from iowa. >>rom ohio. >> from ohio, rather. from, if you nt to run for be president. but he does have one small problem. folks who are going in power and prominence, public and party, they're not quite so sure about john boehner. don't@like that budget deal that you@referred to, that 2011 budget deal. they don't think they got very much. >> he'll be instrumental in that they will like? >> i think -- when he became
6:37pm
speaker he had a narrow agenda stophe bad stuff from lf. happening. so fare's been pre$ty and one thing tea@partyers -- like is he's giving a t through hit budgetcutting plan which isfantastic. >> you remeer the rly stories@ boehner, boehner had a problem with his gland. >> not@a prlem but a challengeí >> he would@-- he wept a lot. >> yes. >> no sign of that.@ >> that's gone. >> yes, and the only presidential question is success. he doesn't wantto be president. >> boehner so declare that? >> it's internallyarts of his he wantsto be speaker. his life. e highest priorit9 in he's achieved it. the other big difference john boehner was once a committee chairman. he pushed legisla$ion throughl
6:38pm
he knows how to make deals@at the coittee levels and he believes in the houseworkiwn. righting legislation in the hands of a tight-knit group of peoplea"ound the speake dennis hastert ntued that, nancy pelosi continued that. john boehner is unwinding that concentration of power, making the house a@differt place. >>i think he's got a ot. >> at @@becoming the president? >> yes. >> i don't see that, john. >> just thk about it. >> i just think there are other people are. >> his brand ofrepublicanism would carry. >> but i n't think has the@ -- either the bition or personality@todo that. >> he likes golf too ch! go on campaign trails. >> what about eisenhowe"? eisenhower liked golf a lot >> exit @@estion,@s hn boehner brout civili back to congress, yes or no?@ >> i think to a great @@extent. he is morealmer, asonable, rational guy. he done a good job dog that. >> he's la back, but he's
6:39pm
representing a republican caulk thaws is really ha edged don't get foedby the coming ong. >> at's the acid tes$. everyone knows that. are have a chance to express or themselves in the commite process and on the floor, they get their shot. that's what ople want their voices expressed that way. it's that that brings civility, not other became you let peop speak, and they speak they beco more civil. it's a natural process. >>s he a deal maker? >> absolutely. >> isn't that a great advantage? politics partularly.@el, @@and i overselling boehner. t -- >> a lit$le bit. but he's an engaging personality. >> he grows on you. together a deal. >> when you see boner, don't you get the@impression you're dealing the real thing, the real boehner? >> absolely. >> and even though y know there's aered and@layered @@ove
6:40pm
real thing? issue two, fannie and fried, capital punishment? >> the federal national mortgage association, also known as fannie mae, and the federal home loan mortgage association, also known as freddie mac, were both created by the u.s. government. the two exist with the same purpose -- to increase homeownership by increasing the number of mortgages ised to u.s. homeowners. this is how they work. fannie and freddie buy mortgages from banks, and sell them to investors as securities. that frees up capital for banks to issue more mortgages, naturally, long-term fixed interest rate mortgages. but critics have fingered them with playing a major role in spurring the great recession. they say fannie and freddie
6:41pm
sold shoddy mortgages to wall street. when those mortgages defaulted, so did the stock market, spurringthe cris. sosays former licy. if the u.s. government had not chosen this policy th, the great financial@crisis of would never have occurred." more fanniend freddie, we're talking about two institutions, and the average americancan't walk in there and take a mortgage. who is -- who do they dl with? >> theyeal withother fincial in institutions,@o in turn put their mortgages with fannie and frede. that's the bulk of the mortgages. the point that peter is making is absoluty right, in the sense that the congress
6:42pm
which people we able to buy @@@@ homes. prices wld never go down some g@ everybody thought instead of @@ having 20% down, it got down to lower percentages so there was very little equity and when the rket began to turn down, the home mortgageswent into default in the llions, not just @@in the thousands, and i$ maet, and thats still something that we are@@@still dealing with as we sit here today. and frede?uy stock in fannie >> they were public companies. that was one of real issues who managed that company had a mang sure @@th shall@we say t the loans about od loans. they were giving the loans to eve"ybody. do that. ess pressedthem to t it tued intoa hu multi- -- >> it's a capitalistic enterprise.@ they wan(ed to make money. >> 9es, but it was all with governnt money. that's the proem. >> making money on $he rket. >>tha$'s correct.
6:43pm
>> n't that an oddity? disgrace in tes. y itorked t. >> 'hy, because@it was missing? because the9 had an incentive to improve the stock price and not worry abour -- >> by making all ese loans huh short-term profits and long- term losses. you were able to book gains in the short run, and so many of these -- millions -- [everyone talking at once] >> why are we talking @@about this? why? >> beuse wall street wts to make it look like fannie and freddie re the drivers behind the mor$gage collap, when in fact wall s$reet d the way basically caught up. i think fannie and freddie@were the product of government policy, bo parts, and president bush chamoned the @@ ownership ety, and pushing low@cost mortgages were part of the publican inroad into the hispanic community some this wreaks of politics, but you
6:44pm
cannot say that fannie and freddie led the way withll ose@financial instrumen$sí fannie and frdie got into the act@when they lost a great sec$ion of the mortgage market because goldman sachs and meryl lynch and everybody else was instruments, and@the ial unregulation allowed them to go the crowd but they did t lead the way. abo-t 3 cents apiece, for@each is -- diminished vadew. re now >> then they were taken by the federal government. congress said they uld face $25 billion with sses. i y they will face $500 biion. already banks are paying back their money. >> zero. of investment? >> $hat's ght. >> 50 billion banks to far lost to taxpayers, loss to taxpayers, $150 billion. it willbe more. obama administration wants to
6:45pm
windit down. republicans want to wind it down it's all a matter of pacing. itwill be wound down. because @@there souch inventory in e market that can't and won't clear. yore not going to clear fannie and freddie til you clear the market. and the market won'tclear for five to 10 years. >> they're priding er 90% of the mortgages@in america. they're the only institution willg to anecome whatyou they did was@they lost a fortune in terms of long-term -- >> because they were gse, government spoored entity, that had the implied backing of the federal taxpaye". and that's y they were riskier th they should. >> james, i don't wanto you think there's a tutorial and u're eck clued. you people and feel as though you' been represented enough? >> go to the e0it question. >> i'll defer to your judgment on @@that. >> let's go the e0it qution. should fannie and freddie be yes or no?@ >> no, i@think they should a"e
6:46pm
be wound down, privatized. and if a publican ns the presidency i ink th will conservatives el they're at the heart of the entire naial mess, and i don't think that they'll be long for this world if that political >> does@that reflect the president's view? >> no, president@obama @@reflec owners' view, and we also han't mentiod very loose fed policy for many ars. >> what was george w. bush's view today on freddie and -- @@ fannie and freddie? >> well, i'm not surewhat his view would be but o much ownership. part of that. ddie were huge and bill clinton had a huge role in lowering mortgage standardsí >>both parties political a pointe who made far @@too much [everyone talking at once] friend by the obama administration, through congress, that will wind @@@@do these government entities. >> what is in the public
6:47pm
interest, major? should they be -- >> more rental property. >> seously,@@i'm not kidding. the idea -- [everyone talking at ce] >> the homeownership can be a@ universal@american aspiration, yes. reality, no. bad@thingsappen. >> tre's another player in the scene@that hasn'$ been mentioned, alan@greenspaní >> he pushedterest rates . @@ down in @@2001 when when had th dot-com @@bubble bursting d he was worried@the financial markets may come apart d then those interest rates were kept down for1% for three or four years. atlowered mortgagerates and everyby jumped into the mortge market. >> you thinthey should be terminated? >> yes, i do. >> you do. i'm with you. issue three, groovy grover! >> conservatives have been stallworth supporters every big defense spending, but a conservative factor now wants to shrink the size of the@
6:48pm
pentagon the defit fought, namely, the head of the americans for tax reform grover norquist. last november he sent a letter to republican leaders calling for congress to -- norquist in january said shrinking the pentagon meant that conservatives need to rethink our presence in afghanistan. >> >> question, next year's g.o.p.
6:49pm
presidenti p mares, will defense spending be nds off a wedge issue@that divides the contendsers? >> i thk they're alrey divided. i think tim pawlenty is tang a super-hawk pro defense, we're not @@going to cut defense spending stance. other candidates, ronpaul, jon huntsman are for@shrinking the dget. it about 5%. at the ends of the clinton era it was 3. i think there's tremendo appetite in both parties to lower defense spendi. what will @@republicans offer t democrats in return for getting entitlement reform and they don't want raise@taxes. they might office defen cu. >> south carolina senator setor grahamcan't imagine a repuican running to the left of president @@obama on defense but i thk it's reall9 hard to see what is the emerging rldview ming from this sets republans but they've been
6:50pm
freed by the@fact there's a democrat in the white house to be @@critical of military engagements but haven't defined and@what they uld do 'ithout that. >> what @@do you think? two prisms. one is operational. draw down afghanistan and the war in iraq. that saves money. the other one retitive systems. the f35, there was a dual engine, the projects 15, 20 years. it was killed in the 2011 budget deal. john boehner cared about that, built outside of his district. he let that stay. individual pjects like that ll go operational costs will come down. gates hada big role in yes, did. >> gohead. >>ea i think they'll center to try to cut the @@defense buet by, i don't know,@0 -- 50, 100 billion, dollars00 billion is the numbe" i've seen over 10 years. >> okay with reducing the budget? >> yes. >>worry you? >> china -- >> if we don't maintain a@ position of worl military superiority we won't be the number one in the@wod, check? >> if we let our economy down
6:51pm
the toilet, we won't be number one in the world@either. and we cat afford this! >> we're not number one militaly in the world -- in @@ our -- in our circumstances. we will still -] @@not be the number one [everyone talki at once] worlds power? next 15 countries we'll still power. number one military [everyone talking at once]@@ >> nal power and counterinsurgency. that where you'll see the >> we center to maintain military superiority ove" everyone to be the worlds's number issue four, brace for impact! ptain chelsea sullenberger visited the aviation museum in north carolina for the arrival of the u.s. airways plane that he piloted to an emergency setdown in the hudson river two and a half years ago, january 15, 2009.
6:52pm
that miraculous performance saved the lives of 155 people. flight 1549 oak off from new york. minutes after takeoff the plane suffered a pilot's nightmare. two birds flew directly into one of the plane's two engines, and permanently shut it down, realizing this sullenberger had to take numerous variables into conside"ation in little or almost no time. distance tocommercial or highway, the estimated traffic on those sites, fuel availability, competing air traffic, man containing stability of the aircraft in the flight, wind velocity, altitude, and above all, staying calm! he look occupant his cockpit window and it all pulled together, a clean strip of the hudson river. no marine craft new york barges, fuselages, gauged by him, all lined up. it worked. the plane landed successfully
6:53pm
in the hudson river without major damage to the plane and without the loss of a single life. sullenberger's actions that day surely embodied the americ spirit, which inspires our nation. the president of the carolinas aviation museum where the airplane is now exhibited said this about planplane, the pilo and the performance -- sullenberger threal mccoy, genuine hero? >> oh, he's a genuine hero. everything in focus and brought that ane in with almost
6:54pm
he was worshipped for. that he's is the kind of hero americans have been looking for in various was of @@life, and really just performedí it was absolutely amazg what nobody could believe he was able to do that. >> do you feel that this plane ought to be in the smithsonian nonumber one -- >> is it smithsonian? kind of lost where the -- >> i'm surised one of politil parties haven't john glen r for the senate after he became the first n to circ the moon, and this kinds of hersm does offering lead to a political career. but ving said tha$, the plane is too big for the smithsonian. >> you think -- mall --everyo talking at on] >>ook a$ the plane, i$'s going look like every other u.s. airplane. i don't know the plane itself will be all that exciting. >> have you been to @@the smithsonian recently. that los diffent@from
6:55pm
wha$ we're seeing. >> you go to the@reanmuseum,@ @@rce one@there, the whole thing rebuilt. >> the icon is chelsea sullenberger, not the plane. and as someone@who has a hard miraculous, and the that plane down. and the inspiration of his caness conveyed to the@crew and paengers, who handled everything, everythingwas@ hands with calm, cool, @@@@ collteddivess, and that seems to be -- >> the rescue teams on the ore were also bringing in tes ofhow quickly they got out there to save people too. >> where it seems like nothg is, tw particully ght, where people @@aren't competent i me, very to do build a serate building for the sully next to t whateve" the case may bei ink it's something rth commemorating. >> theyinds a nice place for
6:56pm
6:57pm
6:58pm
6:59pm